Thank Goodness It's Monday #401

 WHAT TO DO

ABOUT CATCH-22?

It seems as if some time warp has caught up to me – again.

In a recent conversation with a younger (much younger) colleague I said, about an apparent impasse we had reached with some other folks, “Yeah, that’s a real Catch-22.” 

There was a nod of acknowledgement and agreement, a meaningful silent pause, and then -- while thumbing through the documents we were working on -- I was asked –

“Uh, where in this paperwork is Catch-22 specified?”

Uh, oh. Another classic reference point (at least for my generation) bites the dust.

 

Novelist Joseph Heller (b. 1923) died in 1999 and, I guess, somewhere in the decade and a half or so since then, much of his status as a voice and a depicter of the lives of generations immediately post-WWII has diminished. So the phrase “Catch-22” had some contextual meaning for my young associate, but the roots of its origin have all but disappeared.

I can’t let that happen quite yet. 

So today’s TGIM will take a small, non-scholarly look back in an attempt to appreciate the source a bit longer and find some Takeaways that perhaps we can use to circumvent or even prevent Catch-22 situations.

Heller’s early popular fame as a writer came in 1961 with the success of his novel Catch-22.

The literary “catch” – which involved pilots in the Second World War – was fictional, of course. 

But the situation it sums up – an absurd piece of circular reasoning – quickly entered everyday language.

Here’s how Heller first described the “catch” in Catch-22 itself:

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was a process of a rational mind.

Orr (a character in the story) was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more (combat) missions.

Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he had to fly them.

If he flew them, he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.

Yossarian (who is pretty much the stand-in for the author himself, Heller having WWII service very much like that at the core of the story) was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.

“That’s some catch, that Catch-22,” he observed.

“It’s the best there is,” Doc Daneeka agreed.

Watch this: In the real world the creation of Catch-22s is often inadvertent; the mix up of a number of decisions or instructions that, over time, create an undesirable closed loop of consequences.

TGIM ACTION IDEA #1: Sometimes the unfortunate consequences result from a single decision that’s made without all the facts in place. 

In cases such as these, alert and caring action on the part of an individual willing to step up and acknowledge the predicament can quickly undo the harmful decision.

TGIM ACTION IDEA #2: Sometimes a Catch-22 kind of policy can accomplish a goal (like in the case of Heller’s novel, it discourages pilots from quitting a difficult task).

Most intelligent people can accept such situations if two important leadership factors are present.

 

• One is leadership that’s willing to lead, to get involved and reason through the policy with anyone who fails to grasp its necessity.
• The other is a leadership that recognizes that there are exceptions to every rule and that it may be in the best interests of the overall enterprise to grant an exception and move on with the business at hand.

Either way: Managing a Catch-22 situation requires presence and conviction; taking the leadership lead in a way others look up to.

The characters in Heller’s novel lack such an icon and that lack makes the story.

TGIM TAKEAWAY: Be guided in your leadership style by what the Catch-22 characters conclude about their critically-flawed, top-ranking officer Major Major:

Some men are born mediocre … some men achieve mediocrity … some men have mediocrity thrust upon the. With Major Major it had been all three.

And there’s more sharp-tongued observational wisdom about the human character and human condition from the pages of Catch-22 that shares Joseph Heller’s genius with words: 

He was a self-made man who owed his lack of success to nobody.

He had decided to live forever or die in the attempt.

Even among men lacking in distinction he inevitably stood out as a man lacking more distinction than all the rest, and people who met him were always impressed by how unimpressive he was.

General Peckem liked to listen to himself talk, and liked most of all listening to himself talk about himself. 

TGIM IDEA IN ACTION: Don’t be like so many of Heller’s characters so much of the time. Fight against mediocrity. Be outstanding, brilliant, and exceptional. 

In the novel the important character of Captain John Yossarian comes to realize that Catch-22 does not actually exist. But, because the powers that be claim it does, and the world believes it does, it nevertheless has power. In fact, because Catch-22 does not exist, it’s more powerful; there is no way it can be repealed, undone, overthrown, or denounced. 

Don’t buy that thinking. In the end Yossarian realizes it is possible to defeat (or at least escape) his situation and the Catch-22 that supports it. It’s not a particularly happy ending but it is true to the spirit of the character and the (IMHO) evolved state of personal awareness growing in the early 1950s and ’60s.

Yossarian justifies his Catch-22-circumventing action with the statement –

"I’m not running away from my responsibilities. I’m running to them.”

Perhaps we can do the same.

Geoff Steck
Chief Catalyst
Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631
201-569-5373
tgimguy@gmail.com

P.S. Literature 201 fact check: What many who use the phrase today even knowing its origin don’t know is that there was almost no Catch-22.

 

From Joseph Heller's original manuscript
now archived in the Brandeis University Library
Special Collections

The first chapter of Heller’s novel was published a half-dozen years before its bestseller long form in the publication New World Writing as Catch-18. But the numerical designation was later altered so that Heller’s book-length version would not be confused with another best seller of the same period by author Leon Uris entitled Mila 18.

Thank Goodness It's Monday #400

LIFE & LEADERSHIP LESSONS FROM

A MAD MAN

He put the eye-patched man in a Hathaway shirt …

 … Gave the world Commander Whitehead of the Schweppes ads and the quality of “Schweppervesence"…

… And told us that “at 60 miles an hour, the loudest noise you’ll hear in this new Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock.”

One of his greatest successes noted, "Only Dove is one-quarter moisturizing cream". This campaign helped Dove become the top selling soap in the U.S.

If you understand any or all of these perhaps-dated references, then you may know that “he” is advertising mastermind –

David Mackenzie Ogilvy 1911 - 1999

David Ogilvy

A not-so-mad Mad Man. In many ways he was the quintessential post World War II, big Manhattan ad agency character recreated and depicted with some accuracy lately in the popular TV series, Mad Men.

Although not quite the series fictional “Dan Draper” leading man, Ogilvy did report, “Many people - and I think I am one of them - are more productive when they've had a little to drink. I find if I drink two or three brandies, I'm far better able to write.”

Elsewhere he commented, “If all else fails, I drink half a bottle of rum and play a Handel oratorio on the gramophone. This generally produces an uncontrollable gush of copy.”

But I’m not sure those are his best suggestions for TGIM purposes.

David Ogilvy’s come back to “top of mind” for me in part as a result of the abundance of “wizard” references in TGIM #399. It reminded me that --

In his heyday (and perhaps its heyday) Time magazine called Ogilvy “the most sought-after wizard in the advertising business.”

And while his namesake agency still survives and thrives, perhaps his greatest legacy was an approach to advertising and management that we can all learn and profit from.

TGIM Takeaway: Ogilvy’s approach assumed the intelligence of the people he was dealing with. “In the modern world of business,” he said, “it is useless to be a creative original thinker unless you can also sell what you create. Management cannot be expected to recognize a good idea unless it is presented to them by a good salesman.”

But this lesson was slow in coming for him.

David Ogilvy was not an obvious candidate for business success. He flunked out of Oxford University, worked in the kitchen of a Paris hotel, sold door-to-door, and tried his hand at farming.

He was 37 years old when, in 1948, he started the now world-renowned Ogilvy & Mather with two staffers and no clients. The firm has become an international advertising, marketing and public relations agency which currently operates 450 offices in 120 countries with approximately 18,000 employees.

In the “How to Run an Advertising Agency” chapter of his book Ogilvy on Advertising (one of several he penned, any or all of which I recommend you add to your business/personal library) he gives four tips that would benefit “leaders” anywhere. Here they are --

#1: Never allow two people to do a job which only one could do. George Washington observed, “Whenever one person is found adequate to the discharge of a duty by close application thereto, it is worse executed by two persons, and scarcely done if three or more are employed therein.”

#2: Never summon people to your office. It frightens them. Instead, go to see them in their offices, unannounced. A boss who never wanders about the agency becomes an invisible hermit.

#3: If you want to get action, communicate verbally. If you want the voting to go your way at a meeting, go to the meeting. Remember the French saying: “He who is absent is always in the wrong.”

#4: It is bad manners to use products which compete with your clients’’ products. When I got the Sears Roebuck account, I started buying all my clothes at Sears. This bugged my wife, but the following year a convention of clothing manufacturers voted me the best-dressed man in America.

Ogilvy also notes:

An early (1892) set of Russian nested dolls
attributed to carver Vasily Zvyozdochkin 
from a design by Sergey Malyutin,
who was a folk crafts painter.

When someone is made head of an office in the Ogilvy & Mather chain, I send a matroishka doll from Gorky (Russia). If he (or she) has the curiosity to open it, and keep opening it until he comes to the inside of the smallest doll, he finds this message:

If each of us hires people who are smaller than we are, we shall become a company of dwarfs. But if each of us hires people who are bigger than we are, we shall become a company of giants.

Dwarves and giants and wizards, oh my.

Geoff Steck
Chief Catalyst
Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631
201-569-5373
tgimguy@gmail.com

P.S.  “If it doesn't sell, it isn't creative.” David Ogilvy (1911 – 1999) said that, too.

Being Aware Of The Ides Of March

A Question To Consider:

“Beware The Ides of March?” 

Today’s the day: March 15. 

Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar made it famous in our “modern” age – the soothsayer cautioning the great Roman emperor against what turned out to be the day his opponents planned and did assassinate him. 

And the play’s historically accurate in that regard.

But do you know what the “Ides” are? 

Turns out there are “Ides” each of month. The Romans organized their calendar around three days of each month, each of which served as a reference point for counting (in Roman numerals – think about it) the other days. 

The “named” days were:

• Kalends (1st day of the month)
• Nones (the 7th day in March, May, July, and October; the 5th in the other months)
• Ides (the 15th day in March, May, July, and October; the 13th in the other months) 

The remaining, unnamed days of the month were identified by counting backwards from the Kalends, Nones, or Ides. And the backwards counting included the named day. 

No wonder the Roman Empire eventually declined and fell.

One more factoid: If you lived in ancient Rome (c. 220 – 153 BCE) you'd have been aware that March’s Ides marked the beginning of the consular year, since the two annually elected Roman consuls took office on the Ides. By Julius Caesar’s time the consuls took over on the Kalends of January which we now call New Year’s Day.

So “Beware?” Well, as co-creator of the Best Year Ever! Program with my buddy Eric Taylor, I’m fond of pointing out –

 

A New Year can begin any time. And it pays to Be Aware – not just “Beware” -- of the opportunities to rethink and begin anew those behaviors you’d like to “resolve” to change or improve.

So today’s a particularly significant and good a day to do so.

Happy New Year! Friends … Romans …Countrymen. 

If these Catalyst Collection blog posts and TGIM tidbits awaken you to new or enlightening experience … if even one helps you see what might otherwise go unnoticed in your day … cool. 

If just one post suggests a change in your routine that stimulates a different point of view with the potential to lead to breakthrough thinking … excellent.

As the Shakespearean version goes, after Caesar hears the prophecy he responds:

Caesar: The Ides of March are come.

Soothsayer: Ay, Caesar; but not gone.

I agree:

 

How many ages hence

Shall this our lofty scene be acted o’er,

In states unborn, and accents yet unknown! 

Geoff Steck

Chief Catalyst

Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631

201-569-5373

 

tgimguy@gmail.com

P.S. In Julius Caesar Act 4, scene 3, 218–224, Shakespeare has Brutus make this Catalyst-Collection-worthy observation:

There is a tide in the affairs of men

Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;

Omitted, all the voyage of their life

Is bound in shallows and in miseries.

On such a full sea are we now afloat,

And we must take the current when it serves,

Or lose our ventures.

Thank Goodness It's Monday #399

FIT FOR A WIZARD

So this Wizard of Oz prequel that opened in movie theaters this past Friday has probably turned in a multi-million dollar first weekend.

I hope it proves to be a worthy addition to the canon. As you have undoubtedly learned if you’ve been anywhere near the popular media in recent days, there’s a long history of Oz-iana on stage and screen, dating back to some of the earliest successes – and failures -- of the L. Frank Baum empire.

But did you know: It’s a world that almost wasn’t. Baum’s achievements in the world of children’s literature came long after struggles and failures in a variety of other endeavors. 

 

Case in point: If you wanted to be a collector of the complete works of L. Frank Baum, you would need to own his first book, published in 1886:

 



The copy pictured here
is a 20th Century reproduction,
collectible in its own right.

The Book of the Hamburgs: A Brief Treatise upon the Mating, Rearing, and Management of the Different Varieties of Hamburgs which sprang from years of experience writing for The Poultry Record, a monthly trade journal he created in 1880.

 

There’s plenty of interesting Baum biographical material just a mouse click or two away if you want to dig deeper into his celebrity “prequel” story and the difficulties that followed him throughout his life.

But for today --

 

What I really wanted to share is a story that becomes “top of mind” for me almost every time I see the “classic” 1939 Wizard of Oz movie will be aired. It’s a tale that originated with the studio and was popularized by the master storyteller, Paul Harvey.

 

It goes something like this:

Of all the major players in the film, the one viewers are least likely to be able to name is Frank Morgan, although he played several roles in the movie.

• The first was Professor Marvel, the traveling sideshow man Dorothy encounters in the early black-and-white sequences of the film.
• Other secondary roles in which Morgan appeared were as the Emerald City Coachman/Soldier/Guard at the Gates
• Finally, and most notably, he was the Wizard himself.

The role of Professor Marvel required Morgan to wear a particular kind of coat, one reflecting a shabby gentility, a grandeur gone to seed.

MGM's Wardrobe Department was notified and they gathered 50+ coats from secondhand shops around Los Angeles. Morgan and movie director Victor Fleming met to select one coat from the collection. The one they decided on was tired with age: a Prince Albert coat, made of black broadcloth and flared at the waist with a nap-worn velvet collar.

It fit Frank Morgan perfectly.

The scenes involving Professor Marvel took about a week to shoot. On one of the filming days, particularly warm and made warmer still by the hot studio lights, Morgan was perspiring profusely under the weight of this coat. Between takes he turned the sweat-soaked coat pockets inside out to air them out. When he looked down, he saw the label of the Chicago tailor who made the coat, followed by the name of the original owner written in indelible ink.

MGM contacted the tailor and the identity of the original owner was confirmed. 

After the movie was completed, Professor Marvel's coat was presented to the widow of the former owner.

Yes, she said, the coat had been her husband's.

L. Frank Baum
in his more affluent days

Q: Have you guessed the owner? 

The well-worn garment had been selected because it was right for the part and because it fit Frank Morgan.  But, perhaps with a touch of the magic that makes The Wizard of Oz movie of 1939 so enjoyable and memorable, Professor Marvel wore a coat originally made for author, L. Frank Baum.

Q: Cool, right?

Sure it is. 

But does it have application in our not-necessarily-skipping-down-the-yellow-brick-road-to-a-happy-ending lives?

Sure it does.

TGIM TAKEAWAY #1: Coincidence happens. Don’t make too much of it.

While the coat connection seems somehow magically ordained, we attribute that ability to it because we want to endow it with special power and, I suspect, hope for similar moments of wonder directly in our lives. But the underlying facts are that Baum, who went to Hollywood to parlay his luck early in the days of Oz-iana success, did not enjoy unmitigated financial success there and had to declare bankruptcy.

Maybe he even hocked that fine coat he brought from Chicago.

Not much magic in all that.

 

TGIM ACTION IDEA: Still Baum persisted and there were many highs among the lows of his life. The tale of the coat exemplifies that. Once elegant, then “reflecting a shabby gentility, a grandeur gone to seed,” then coming alive again in a tale of wonder linked to another difficulty executed but astoundingly successful theatrical execution of, well, a tale of wonder.

 

TGIM IDEA IN ACTION: Work for the highs; work through the lows. It’s not magic; it’s life. We should: Follow our chosen path … Persist with grace … Survive the down times … Compromise if we must … Have the success of knowing we did our best and touched others in a meaningful way … Be grateful that we may be forever associated with some classic life-affirming deed or occasion.

On the other hand …

Not to be too much of a spoiler of the magic: Baum biographer Michael Patrick Hearn disbelieves the accuracy of the coat connection tale, maintaining it had been refuted by members of the Baum family, who never saw the coat or knew of the story. Paul Harvey, who has vocal detractors as well as avid fans, did have a tendency to be less than rigorous in his “reporting.” And, actress Margaret Hamilton – the 1939 movie Wicked Witch of the West -- considered it a concocted studio rumor.

TGIM TAKEAWAY #2: Sometimes a good story is just a good story. Proceed through life accordingly.

TGIM ACTION IDEA: Dig for the truth when it’s important. Dig deeper if it’s really important. Then choose your facts and truth for a justifiable reason, but be ready to accept additional authoritative evidence that might alter your position. It’s OK to waffle or change your stance.

 

I’ve known the coat-connection story since maybe the mid-1980s. I really like the story just on the face of it, no takeaways or philosophizing. But I’ve also always been a bit skeptical and reluctant to share it as much more than a nod to a good tale, well told. More than a dozen years ago when I last shared it in any kind of publically published way I drew no conclusions for my readers but I also shared none of my reservations about its authenticity.

TGIM IDEA IN ACTION: Now I have, because the evolved digital information age makes it even easier to do due diligence. I’ve done mine, as much as I feel is necessary for our TGIM moments together. And I ended up with a second lesson I think was worth sharing.

Hope you agree.

Wishing you courage, brains, and heart.

Geoff Steck

Geoff Steck
Chief Catalyst
Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631
201-569-5373
tgimguy@gmail.com

P.S. You almost can’t do an Oz story without acknowledging it. “Over the Rainbow” was very nearly deleted from the 1939 classic movie. MGM felt that the song made the Kansas sequence too long, as well as being far over the heads of the target audience of children. The studio also thought that it was degrading for Judy Garland to sing in a barnyard. (But Baum might have liked the chickens in the scene.) Producer Mervyn LeRoy, associate producer Arthur Freed, and director Victor Fleming fought to keep it. Eventually they got their way. 

 

The song went on to win the Academy Award for Best Song of the Year. And “Over the Rainbow” was ranked #1 in the American Film Institute’s “100 Years…100 Songs” list in 2004.

Thank Goodness It's Monday #398

HOW TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK

Straight talk – I hope that’s part of what most folks who work with me expect to get as part of the bargain.


"I am Gunnery Sergeant Hartman,
your senior drill instructor.
From now on you will speak only when spoken to,
and the first and last words out of your filthy sewers
will be 'Sir'.
Do you maggots understand that?"

Actor R. Lee Ermey
giving "constructive feedback"
in the movie Full Metal Jacket.

Ermey is, in fact, a retired U.S. Marine and
an honorary Gunnery Sergeant.
During his tenure in the U.S. Marine Corps,
he served as a drill instructor. 
 

Because they’re going to get it.

It goes something like this:

 

• I’ve got experience and opinions, as you do.
• I gain insight and information when you share yours without holding back.
• And I can best serve our mutually beneficial purpose if I can act, and we can talk, in the same respectful-but-unencumbered way.

So it can be the classic “Win-Win” when we keep the feedback constructive.

The only trouble is, feedback can be mishandled and become –

 A double-edged sword. When it comes across as harsh, one-sided criticism, it can make others defensive. Rather than listening and learning, people will try to defend themselves or discount what they’re hearing -- with dire consequences.

So, jumping into defensive mode: I’ll confess right now that I can (often) be a bit too sarcastic or ironic in tone and manner … sound a bit acerbic and opinionated … come across as adamant and insistent, thereby defeating my own good intentions.

But, dammit, I’m usually right. (That’s a joke, folks. Really. Well, sort of.)

Of course I sometimes need to be reminded that my rightness ain’t always so and/or that I’ve been too blunt in stating my case. And in that spirit I’ve worked up some get-back-on-track guidelines for myself when I’ve gone astray. I’m going to share them here as today’s – 

TGIM ACTION IDEAS: Follow these guidelines for giving more effective and constructive critical feedback. And as part of the feedback process, consider sharing the guidelines with others so they can apply them in their interactions with others, including you.

Guideline #1: Double-check your attitude. Check (as in “assess”) your attitude, then check (as in, “rein in”) your response if you’re angry or upset. Make sure your motives are right. When you can’t be sure you’re objective, wait until you cool off, otherwise others will pick up the emotions and respond defensively.

Your move: Never use feedback as a way to assert superiority or get back at someone. At least in your own mind, forgive a mistake before you try to address it. 

Guideline #2: It’s all in the timing. Generally the sooner you give feedback the better. But choosing the absolutely right time is a bit of a judgment call.

Your move: Be considerate of the feelings of others. While you may want to react close to the incident, acting too soon – especially to a difficult event or glaring error – may have a negative impact. At best, a person who is upset won’t be attentive to what you have to share. So proceed with caution when the road looks rocky.

Guideline #3: Ask permission. Does it seem a bit odd that adults working together would need to ask permission to be critical? It shouldn’t. Your asking can certainly be disarming and spark some curiosity. (And, in fact, it’s quite an effective power play on your part.)

Your move: Simply ask, “Are you open to some feedback on this?” By asking you let others determine when they’re ready, willing and able to receive constructive input – “able” being the most important piece of the equation.  When they say the “ready, willing and able” time has come, they’ve committed themselves to being receptive to what you have to say.

Guideline #4: Establish the common ground first. For a more effective exchange of feedback, establish or reestablish this is as a Win-Win state of affairs. Focus on shared values that relate to the situation. Make clear how you see the other party will benefit.

Your move: Begin on a positive note. Start with a sincerely affirmative statement of a particular strength that relates to the feedback you intend to give. As long as it’s not B.S., affirmation not only encourages the other person, it confirms your perceptive nature and adds weight to your observations.

Example: “Karen, I can’t help but notice how you always maintain such a professional demeanor. May I share something that may help you become even more effective?”

Guideline #5: Be specific. Don’t slip into saying things like, “You need to work faster” or “Can’t you get the work done on time?” This kind of feedback doesn’t tell the person what specific behavior needs changing and it doesn’t point to a path to improvement.

Your move: Be direct with your feedback, not too general or vague. Get to the point; avoid giving hints. Link your comments to a specific incident to illustrate your concern. Focus on what to do rather than what not to do.

Guideline #6: Offer suggestions. Good feedback not only informs, it instructs. Don’t just point out what needs to be done differently; offer ideas and suggestions on how to improve.

Your move: Go the extra mile. Don’t just lecture. Ask if you can help. Provide guidance while also allowing that yours is not necessarily the carved-in-stone “only way.”

Guideline #7: End on the upbeat. Do not belabor the point or carry on too long. Say your piece … listen objectively to what the other party has to say … then get back to your routine.

Your move: Keep control of the end.  Communicate your concern and belief that the other person can and will triumph. Turn your closing comments into a challenge for the future.

So in that spirit, we’ll not belabor the subject matter and will end with this observation and -- 

TGIM Challenge:  Most people want to know how they’re doing and will, eventually, appreciate an effort made on their behalf. 

Remember: Failure to provide feedback is actually a kind of feedback – THE WORST KIND! It can lead people to conclude that what they’re doing isn’t consequential and important or that everything is OK when it’s not.

So have at it. Feel free to provide feedback, on this or any other topic we’ve touched on in TGIM. We’d love to make this an even more mutually beneficial Win-Win exchange.

(Just play by the rules, please.)

Geoff Steck
Chief Catalyst
Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631
201-569-5373
tgimguy@gmail.com

P.S. “How’m I doin’?” Is there any more of a feedback-ready approach to life than the practically trademark greeting of three-term New York City mayor Ed Koch (1924 – 2013)? 

Perhaps best of all: His query wasn’t strictly a political ploy. It was understood as his truly interested request for feedback on his leadership as mayor. And in terms of that feedback he also quipped, “I'm the sort of person who will never get ulcers. Why? Because I say exactly what I think. I'm the sort of person who might give other people ulcers.”